Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 22:55 28 Mar 2024
- Bus plunges off South Africa bridge, killing 45
* Easter getaways hit by travel disruption
- Where Baltimore bridge investigation goes now
- How do I renew my UK passport and what is the 10-year rule?
- Family anger at sentence on fatal crash driver, 19
- Easter travel warning as millions set to hit roads
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
28th Mar (1988)
Formal end to carrying coffins by BR (link)

Train RunningCancelled
20:56 Worcester Foregate Street to London Paddington
22:30 Gatwick Airport to Reading
22:47 Newbury to Bedwyn
Short Run
17:03 London Paddington to Penzance
18:03 London Paddington to Penzance
20:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
21:04 London Paddington to Plymouth
22:10 Severn Beach to Bristol Temple Meads
23:04 Reading to Bedwyn
23:17 Bedwyn to Reading
Delayed
21:30 Gatwick Airport to Reading
21:45 Penzance to London Paddington
23:45 London Paddington to Penzance
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2024-03-25 Easter Escape - to where?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 28, 2024, 22:57:12 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[104] West Wiltshire Bus Changes April 2024
[103] would you like your own LIVE train station departure board?
[78] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[56] If not HS2 to Manchester, how will traffic be carried?
[41] Return of the BRUTE?
[25] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
 
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
Author Topic: Consequential Losses  (Read 18704 times)
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1941


View Profile
« on: March 08, 2018, 06:16:50 »

BBC» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) Radio 4 news summary at 06:00 reports that T & C's are to be revised to give travelers the right to claim for consequential losses.
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5398



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2018, 06:28:25 »

Within reason this sounds a good idea.
There would presumably be a limit on the degree of loss covered.

If due to a failing of the railway, someone misses an airline flight (despite having allowed a reasonable margin) then compensation for the cost of rebooking might be reasonable.

If however a meeting is missed and it is alleged that many £millions have been lost due to a missed business opportunity, then giving the passenger a few million is unrealistic.
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
NickB
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 711


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: March 08, 2018, 07:11:43 »

I’d be happy if they just paid for my sodding cab fare to destination after I’ve gotten myself to the nearest working station following an exploding pigeon/derailed train/fire in the basement.
Logged
TaplowGreen
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7746



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: March 08, 2018, 08:29:10 »

Here it is....

https://www.which.co.uk/news/2018/03/train-companies-misleading-claims-to-hit-the-buffers/?amp_markup=1&__twitter_impression=true

......one less hiding place for GWR (Great Western Railway) et al.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #4 on: March 08, 2018, 08:34:59 »

Quote
The Consumer Rights Act (CRA) came into effect for the rail industry on 1 October 2016, however it has taken over a year for the NRCoT to better reflect consumers’ rights.

As well as consequential loss, the CRA means passengers may also be able to claim for poor service.

We found train companies have been giving blanket advice wrongly telling passengers they can’t make a claim, leaving people out of pocket when they could have claimed compensation.

The new conditions of travel should end this misinformation.

Are there any other changes being made in the Conditions of Travel at this time?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: March 08, 2018, 09:46:51 »

Change being made this Sunday. Presumably claims can still only be made where delays etc are under the control of the railway?
Logged
Fourbee
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 672


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: March 08, 2018, 11:50:56 »

So GWR (Great Western Railway) would potentially be on the hook to pay for my £10,000 all-inclusive 1-month stay in Barbados, if I miss my flight from Gatwick?

Good job I didn't book it to start on Monday this week with the cracked points at Wokingham. No spare available, that sounds like without reasonable skill or care...  Cheesy

...then I woke up  Grin

Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: March 08, 2018, 11:57:14 »

Only if you follow their advice by booking to arrive at the airport at least 4 hours ahead of your flight....

Beware, stuff like this will be forthcoming, simply to alleviate the claims.
Reasonable, in this case - airline advice is for 3 hours ahead of flight to check-in (intercontinental), plus an added hour from the TOC (Train Operating Company) in anticipation of any delay.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #8 on: March 08, 2018, 12:11:08 »

It will be interesting to see the consequences - intended and unintended - of consequential loss coverage  Grin

For example, it might now be in the interest of Train Operating Companies to streamline their systems for backup road transport provision when connections fail leaving people stranded (or for those rare  Wink occasions trains are cancelled).     At present, a s-l-o-w system is in the TOC (Train Operating Company)'s financial interest as it means that all but the most hardy (or least well off) find / pay for their own alternatives.   If the taxi fare is reclaimable, though, the pendulum could swing the other way, meaning that in the future, it'll be in the TOC's interest to efficiency fill taxis and get people quickly on there way, rather than having a free-for-all where each passenger or passenger group gets their own taxis and class back ... which would add up to a lot more taxis!
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #9 on: March 08, 2018, 12:59:18 »

I can't see them entertaining a claim for replacement taxis without a wait of at least an hour frankly. If the next train is due within the hour (some say 90mins) they won't pay - I can't see that changing without an (expensive, relatively) court case.
Logged
Fourbee
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 672


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: March 08, 2018, 13:17:04 »

Only if you follow their advice by booking to arrive at the airport at least 4 hours ahead of your flight....

Beware, stuff like this will be forthcoming, simply to alleviate the claims.
Reasonable, in this case - airline advice is for 3 hours ahead of flight to check-in (intercontinental), plus an added hour from the TOC (Train Operating Company) in anticipation of any delay.

I assume most travel insurance policies broadly operate along those lines for that reason.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #11 on: March 08, 2018, 13:40:50 »

I can't see them entertaining a claim for replacement taxis without a wait of at least an hour frankly. If the next train is due within the hour (some say 90mins) they won't pay - I can't see that changing without an (expensive, relatively) court case.

Oh indeed ... the case I was thinking of was 20 passengers for the 18:38 (Saturday) Trowbridge to Melksham, connecting off the train from Bristol and Bath due in at 18:29 but got there at 18:39.   Kept waiting for onward transport until 19:55, by which time all but 6 passengers had made alternative arrangements, such as taking taxis that were there on the rank.  Next train was due at 08:34 - that's 836 minutes later (well over your 90).

Amount paid out by GWR (Great Western Railway) without consequential damages - around £30
Amount potentially paid out if everyone could have claimed - around £240 (say 8 taxis)
Amount paid out if taxis had been promptly provided and passengers marshalled - £120 (4 taxis)

And if the taxis had been provided with good grace and quickly, it would have been seen far more positively by the 20 people involved, and it would have saved those people their own money and a lot of time and heartache!

I agree that if there's another train due within the hour, little point in providing road replacement. That does not mean that the train operator should make customers wait over an hour for a taxi!!
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #12 on: March 08, 2018, 13:48:08 »

Unfortunately, yes it can. And the TOCs (Train Operating Company) are likely to agree - as I said, a number of expensive court cases will be needed to get to your position.

#Lewisham on the other hand....four hours in.....SETrains would have been liable for a lot of money....

Bear in mind that NR» (Network Rail - home page) pay the TOCs compensation for their caused delays, we'll all pay the increased costs, ome way or another, through the increase in National Debt. Paid for by your offspring.
Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #13 on: March 08, 2018, 14:16:19 »

Transport Focus offers their view - which is a tad different to what you are expecting

Quote
The new right could be applied to areas which are currently not covered by the industry’s compensation arrangements. For example, a failure to provide advertised catering arrangements, or reserved seating intended to enable a family or group of friends to sit together, or a failure to warn an intending passenger of longer journeys because of planned engineering works or comfort issues. Claims for consequential losses such as missing a flight would still need to pursued through the courts unless agreement can be reached.
Passengers making a claim of this kind can refer to the Act. However, if they are making a complaint and seeking redress that goes beyond that set out in a Delay Repay scheme or beyond what a train company may have offered in an individual case passengers are going to have to take the train company to court to obtain compensation, as opposed to the relatively simple current arrangements which are dealt with by train companies on a ‘no fault’ basis.


Passengers will generally need to show one of two things. Did the train company (or, for example, Network Rail) provide the service with reasonable care and skill? Did the train company mislead them in some way - was information that they relied on incorrect? In many cases this might be very difficult or impossible to prove.
There are also practicalities that apply to all legal claims. The passenger will have to draft a claim which is legally sound and pay fees to get it issued, and further fees if there is to be a court hearing. Even though virtually all such cases would be dealt with by the less formal Small Claims Procedure we do not think that this will be an easy or user-friendly system, and the fees involved will be beyond the price of many tickets. The passenger will also have to persuade the court that the loss suffered can be quantified (and the fees charged by the court will vary according to the amount claimed).
Part of the package of wider consumer rights includes a cheaper form of legal redress, known as Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). This is designed to avoid the need to go to court. Currently ADR is not in use on the railway, but we continue to press for the introduction of a binding dispute resolution system.
Claims that involve novel or substantive legal issues might also be deemed unfit for the relatively fast track Small Claims procedure. They might then be referred to the main County Court system with its attendant fees and the risk that costs might be awarded against an unsuccessful party. Quite a deterrent.
The train companies could also seek to show that their Delay Repay schemes are an adequate compensation method in a mass transport, heavily Government funded and regulated environment. The rail industry Delay Repay schemes go well beyond anything seen in other transport sectors such as aviation. They also go beyond the Act in one important aspect – they offer compensation irrespective of the cause of the delay, you do not have to prove that there was fault (that is, a lack of care and skill).
So, a claim may have to be relatively large or a claimant very determined to mount a successful claim.

The real effect?
Perhaps the most likely effect is a far more subtle one. Strengthening and broadening rail passengers’ rights is welcome. This will focus more attention on the consistent delivery of the basics of train services such as length of trains and information.
Train companies and others are likely to pay far more attention to their written material to make sure what they are promising is clear and deliverable. We will probably see statements on timetables and in other places about the endeavours that will be made to provide the service, but that any disclaimers do not affect passengers’ statutory rights.
Train companies will probably issue stricter guidance to staff about what information to give passengers. It will be even more important, for example, to tell passengers that a bus replacement service is in operation, catering or Wi-Fi is not available or a connecting journey only has First Class for part of the way. If you can argue that you would not have bought the ticket if you had known that in advance then you may have a case. Similarly, if a cheaper ticket was not available on a ticket vending machine or if booked assistance does not materialise could this constitute lack of care and skill?
Complaints procedures might well be given more attention to make sure they provide better explanations to passengers as to why things went wrong. We are already looking at the advice we give passengers (and publish) to see if there is anything we need to tighten up in the light of the new Act. We will start to build up a bank of good practice and procedure. There will probably be more focus on complying with regulatory codes of practice.
Transport Focus, through its complaint handling work, will monitor and report on how the new Act works in practice. Joint working with the Office of Rail and Road will help ensure that existing complaints handling procedures are adhered to and improved.
Once the promised 15 minute Delay Repay trigger is in place we will closely watch its effect. Above all we will continue to press train companies to advertise the fact passengers can claim compensation and monitor and report on take up.
Conclusion
So, does the Act bring about a revolution in rail passenger rights? No, it perhaps modernises them and brings them into line with other consumer sectors. However, it does shine a welcome light on compensation schemes and complaints and helps to remove any temptation to hide behind the ‘small print’. In addition, and perhaps most importantly, it adds more incentive to provide what has been promised to passengers.

My emphasis
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #14 on: March 08, 2018, 15:30:03 »

Transport Focus offers their view - which is a tad different to what you are expecting

Quote
Claims for consequential losses such as missing a flight would still need to pursued through the courts unless agreement can be reached.
Passengers making a claim of this kind can refer to the Act. However, if they are making a complaint and seeking redress that goes beyond that set out in a Delay Repay scheme or beyond what a train company may have offered in an individual case passengers are going to have to take the train company to court to obtain compensation, as opposed to the relatively simple current arrangements which are dealt with by train companies on a ‘no fault’ basis.

I suspect that's "much as at present" ... if you can't reach amicable agreement over a claim, you can take it to court.  Perhaps the difference is that the balance has now tipped a bit more in favour of the passenger who's had a lot of extra expenses ... and perhaps to the extent that the rail company could in some circumstances be minded to settle up prior to court.

How does the new rail Ombudsman come into this, if at all?

Edit to correct quoting
« Last Edit: March 08, 2018, 15:47:02 by grahame » Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page